Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
London police enforce imaginary law against brave, principled teenaged photographer
Afternoon All.
From BoingBoing:
Two police officers stopped a teenaged freelance photographer from taking pictures of police cadets marching in an Armed Forces Day in London. The officers claimed (incorrectly) that it was against the law to photograph minors without parental consent. Then they pushed him down a set of stairs and detained him. The photographer recorded the incident, including the officers claiming that they didn't need any law to detain him.
http://www.boingboing...don-cops-enforce.html
From the Photographer:
"I was quickly and aggressively stopped by one of their adult officers asking me who I worked for," he wrote on his blog. "I responded that I was a freelance and upon being told I needed parental permission to photograph them, I explained this was a public event in a public place and that I didn't for editorial use."
It is quite a disgusting way for the police to act. The young man stands his ground, remains relatively calm and all he is met with is nonsense from the police. For anyone who suggests "young'uns should have more respect for authority" this is a fine example of why authority is not trusted by the nation's youth.
The video is a mix of the still images taken by the photographer and the sound recorded from the exchange.
Thoughts?
From BoingBoing:
Two police officers stopped a teenaged freelance photographer from taking pictures of police cadets marching in an Armed Forces Day in London. The officers claimed (incorrectly) that it was against the law to photograph minors without parental consent. Then they pushed him down a set of stairs and detained him. The photographer recorded the incident, including the officers claiming that they didn't need any law to detain him.
http://www.boingboing...don-cops-enforce.html
From the Photographer:
"I was quickly and aggressively stopped by one of their adult officers asking me who I worked for," he wrote on his blog. "I responded that I was a freelance and upon being told I needed parental permission to photograph them, I explained this was a public event in a public place and that I didn't for editorial use."
It is quite a disgusting way for the police to act. The young man stands his ground, remains relatively calm and all he is met with is nonsense from the police. For anyone who suggests "young'uns should have more respect for authority" this is a fine example of why authority is not trusted by the nation's youth.
The video is a mix of the still images taken by the photographer and the sound recorded from the exchange.
Thoughts?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by AB Editor. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
My comments are about the Italian photography student:
I'm a fairly recently retired Police Officer and I am truly appalled, but not altogether surprised, at what I've just watched on the video. The two PCSOs have no more powers than any other member of the public, and the one who was interrogating the young Italian girl is one of the main reasons for a lot of public perception of the Police acting like the proverbial little Hitlers.
He had absolutely no authority to detain and interrogate her as he did, and had he suspected her of any offence whatsoever, he should have gotten on his radio and asked for regular Officers to come and deal with the situation. At no point did I hear him telling her that he was only a PCSO with no Police powers, or that he had no right to interrogate her. He clearly took advantage of the girl because she was foreign and he undoubtedly gave her the impression that he was a pukka gen Police Officer.
She was extremely polite and gave him far more answers than I would have. Had she begun to leave the scene, he would not have been lawfully entitled to detain her. A pity she didn't.
He should be disciplined, then kicked out, the whole matter should be referred to the IPCC, and the girl should be compensated for the shocking way in which she was treated - like some kind of criminal. The thick PCSO probably thought she was Al Qaeda, simply because she had a foreign accent and was taking a few harmless photos.
I'm a fairly recently retired Police Officer and I am truly appalled, but not altogether surprised, at what I've just watched on the video. The two PCSOs have no more powers than any other member of the public, and the one who was interrogating the young Italian girl is one of the main reasons for a lot of public perception of the Police acting like the proverbial little Hitlers.
He had absolutely no authority to detain and interrogate her as he did, and had he suspected her of any offence whatsoever, he should have gotten on his radio and asked for regular Officers to come and deal with the situation. At no point did I hear him telling her that he was only a PCSO with no Police powers, or that he had no right to interrogate her. He clearly took advantage of the girl because she was foreign and he undoubtedly gave her the impression that he was a pukka gen Police Officer.
She was extremely polite and gave him far more answers than I would have. Had she begun to leave the scene, he would not have been lawfully entitled to detain her. A pity she didn't.
He should be disciplined, then kicked out, the whole matter should be referred to the IPCC, and the girl should be compensated for the shocking way in which she was treated - like some kind of criminal. The thick PCSO probably thought she was Al Qaeda, simply because she had a foreign accent and was taking a few harmless photos.
Orc,
Thanks for your response. My understanding is that the current route to being a policeman is by first becoming a PCSO? Do you think they are trying to compensate for their lack of powers by being aggressive/citing imaginary laws?
Do you have any suggestions for restructuring the police-force? Or do you believe it works now, albeit with a few hicoughs?
Spare Ed
Thanks for your response. My understanding is that the current route to being a policeman is by first becoming a PCSO? Do you think they are trying to compensate for their lack of powers by being aggressive/citing imaginary laws?
Do you have any suggestions for restructuring the police-force? Or do you believe it works now, albeit with a few hicoughs?
Spare Ed
Spare Ed,
"re-structuring the Police Force"? Perlease, why not just ask me one on sport??? I'm chuckling at such a loaded question, for we'd be here for ever and a day on that one.
The short answer is that whether it be PCSOs, Specials, or whomever, they are simply the "el cheapo option" for the proper thing, no matter what politicians, ACPO or senior cops tell you. Imagine yourself (don't faint!) donning a uniform, being given some very rudimentary training for a few weeks, then being unleashed, say, on the streets of London with probably another PCSO, instead of a "real cop", to show you the ropes. Then, a few weeks later, your safety net's taken away and you're out there on your own. You get all the hassle, grief, and abuse an ordinary copper gets, but with none of the powers s/he has to do something about it.
However, most of "Joe Public" don't know that, all they see is a familiar-ish uniform, so you're fair game to them, you're the same as any other copper, you're just a so called figure of authority in a uniform. Fancy the job???
For many a long year, not only the Met, but all 43 Police Forces in England and Wales have been crying out for reform. And the greatest bane of any operational cop's life is - f***** paperwork!!! Also, every Force is groaning under the weight of excess amounts of senior ranks, be they Deputies, ACPO, Commanders, Chief Superintendents etc etc, whose combined wages are astronomical. Try finding out how many Superintendents and above are part of the Met alone, for example, the results and cost of them would be truly eye watering. Their combined wages alone could employ hundreds more "real" cops, for they are more like CEOs of industry.
Spare Ed, you can see where I'm going, can't you? As they say: "It ain't rocket science!"
"re-structuring the Police Force"? Perlease, why not just ask me one on sport??? I'm chuckling at such a loaded question, for we'd be here for ever and a day on that one.
The short answer is that whether it be PCSOs, Specials, or whomever, they are simply the "el cheapo option" for the proper thing, no matter what politicians, ACPO or senior cops tell you. Imagine yourself (don't faint!) donning a uniform, being given some very rudimentary training for a few weeks, then being unleashed, say, on the streets of London with probably another PCSO, instead of a "real cop", to show you the ropes. Then, a few weeks later, your safety net's taken away and you're out there on your own. You get all the hassle, grief, and abuse an ordinary copper gets, but with none of the powers s/he has to do something about it.
However, most of "Joe Public" don't know that, all they see is a familiar-ish uniform, so you're fair game to them, you're the same as any other copper, you're just a so called figure of authority in a uniform. Fancy the job???
For many a long year, not only the Met, but all 43 Police Forces in England and Wales have been crying out for reform. And the greatest bane of any operational cop's life is - f***** paperwork!!! Also, every Force is groaning under the weight of excess amounts of senior ranks, be they Deputies, ACPO, Commanders, Chief Superintendents etc etc, whose combined wages are astronomical. Try finding out how many Superintendents and above are part of the Met alone, for example, the results and cost of them would be truly eye watering. Their combined wages alone could employ hundreds more "real" cops, for they are more like CEOs of industry.
Spare Ed, you can see where I'm going, can't you? As they say: "It ain't rocket science!"
Photographer detained in Romford:
Having just watched that video, it again puts the Police in a very poor light. The Officer mainly heard talking basically dug himself a hole he couldn't get out of, and rather than swallow his pride and admit it, he tried to waffle his way out of it, because it's rare for the Police on the streets to actually meet someone who knows the law, and it appears in this case, better than they?
I do have a smidgen of sympathy with the cop, who was probably miffed at having been bettered by some "smartass kid" with a camera, an he, the cop, didn't want to lose face in front of his men. But he went about it the wrong way, and it appears as though it was his own ignorance of the law which let him dow, but his professional pride prevented him from rectifying an embarrassing situation.
The Police must accept nowadays that the days of Joe Public meekly accepting a cop's words are long gone, and they must move into the 21 century. The job's hard enough as it is without them contributing to their own downfall.
Having just watched that video, it again puts the Police in a very poor light. The Officer mainly heard talking basically dug himself a hole he couldn't get out of, and rather than swallow his pride and admit it, he tried to waffle his way out of it, because it's rare for the Police on the streets to actually meet someone who knows the law, and it appears in this case, better than they?
I do have a smidgen of sympathy with the cop, who was probably miffed at having been bettered by some "smartass kid" with a camera, an he, the cop, didn't want to lose face in front of his men. But he went about it the wrong way, and it appears as though it was his own ignorance of the law which let him dow, but his professional pride prevented him from rectifying an embarrassing situation.
The Police must accept nowadays that the days of Joe Public meekly accepting a cop's words are long gone, and they must move into the 21 century. The job's hard enough as it is without them contributing to their own downfall.
Would OrcadianOil care to revisit the statement that PCSOs "have no more powers than any other member of the public"?
A list of standard and discretionary powers can be viewed here...
http://en.wikipedia.o...upport_Officer#Powers
A list of standard and discretionary powers can be viewed here...
http://en.wikipedia.o...upport_Officer#Powers
Spare Ed,
Further to what you asked me, there are definite "hiccups" in the Police, and long gone are those halcyon days (if they ever existed?) of Dixon of Dock Green. Today's modern front line copper needs to be many, many things, for Forces up and down the country are being met with all manner of situations that Dixon could never have imagined. The training alone is mind boggling, and all the well documented and high profile incidents over the last, say, 30 years alone would have poor old Dixon spinning in his grave.
Public expectation of our Police Forces, some of which are virtually paramilitary in lots of respects, is sky high, and increasingly, Police Forces are becoming more of a pawn for politicians than they ever used to be. This business of being "locally appointed and locally accountable" is, sadly, laughable, and some of us could actually live to see the day of a national Police Force - mindboggling!
Further to what you asked me, there are definite "hiccups" in the Police, and long gone are those halcyon days (if they ever existed?) of Dixon of Dock Green. Today's modern front line copper needs to be many, many things, for Forces up and down the country are being met with all manner of situations that Dixon could never have imagined. The training alone is mind boggling, and all the well documented and high profile incidents over the last, say, 30 years alone would have poor old Dixon spinning in his grave.
Public expectation of our Police Forces, some of which are virtually paramilitary in lots of respects, is sky high, and increasingly, Police Forces are becoming more of a pawn for politicians than they ever used to be. This business of being "locally appointed and locally accountable" is, sadly, laughable, and some of us could actually live to see the day of a national Police Force - mindboggling!
Incorrect. A PCSO's standard powers allow them to detain for up to 30 minutes until a PC arrives.
You cannot use a broad statement such as "no powers" when they routinely have many more powers than citizens - when was the last time you witnessed a citizen legally issuing an FPND or seizing a vehicle or drugs or any of the other non-meaningful (as you would describe it) actions?
You cannot use a broad statement such as "no powers" when they routinely have many more powers than citizens - when was the last time you witnessed a citizen legally issuing an FPND or seizing a vehicle or drugs or any of the other non-meaningful (as you would describe it) actions?
ABerrant,
I have no idea where you're coming from, but I speak from my own experience of being a Police Officer. When you refer to "A PCSO's powers allow them to detain for 30 minutes until a PC arrives", where do you get such a claim from?
Also, there are hundreds of occasions when a person might have to be "detained", but there are strict guidlines and legislation laid down, i.e. in the Police And Criminal Evidence Act, the Criminal Law Act etc where powers of a Police Officer, and PCSO, are laid out.
You have chosen to mention some nebulous phrase, which I have quoted above, but you totally fail to describe the circumstances, or any legislation giving a PCSO such powers. In my long experience, any civvy in uniform working for the Police would be screaming for an Officer at the slightest sign of trouble, period.
If you are getting your information solely from a text book, or wherever, be careful. What the written word says is not always what actually happens in practice, unless that written word is enshrined within the laws of the land.
I have no idea where you're coming from, but I speak from my own experience of being a Police Officer. When you refer to "A PCSO's powers allow them to detain for 30 minutes until a PC arrives", where do you get such a claim from?
Also, there are hundreds of occasions when a person might have to be "detained", but there are strict guidlines and legislation laid down, i.e. in the Police And Criminal Evidence Act, the Criminal Law Act etc where powers of a Police Officer, and PCSO, are laid out.
You have chosen to mention some nebulous phrase, which I have quoted above, but you totally fail to describe the circumstances, or any legislation giving a PCSO such powers. In my long experience, any civvy in uniform working for the Police would be screaming for an Officer at the slightest sign of trouble, period.
If you are getting your information solely from a text book, or wherever, be careful. What the written word says is not always what actually happens in practice, unless that written word is enshrined within the laws of the land.
-- answer removed --
I listened to the recording of this incident with interest.
It seems to have arisen because many police officers have a poor understanding of the recent incursions to civil liberties which some newish laws have provided. Their misunderstanding has been compounded (or at least not corrected) by their senior officers to the extent that many of them now believe they can stop anybody doing anything at a whim. It is unfortunate that they rarely seem to exercise these misunderstandings to the benefit of people going about their business (by, for example, removing aggressive drunks from the High Street) but instead seem to direct their hostility to people like the young man in this incident. However, that’s another argument.
“Joe Public” has been deliberately kept in ignorance about the true extent of some of these laws (and in some cases – particularly with regard to photography of children - he has even been actively misinformed) to such an extent that very few people know what the police can and cannot do. As a result, as in this instance, if unchecked they often end up doing what they legally cannot do. I found it very notable that in this instance, when repeatedly pressed for a reason for their actions, the explanation swung violently from anti-social behaviour, through “personal public privacy” (eh?), breach of the peace, obstruction, a hint at paedophilia and finally to anti-terrorism. It is clear that the officers had not formulated a proper reason to ask him to move on before they did so.
Essentially the officers involved simply thought the young man needed to be moved on. They did not particularly know why, but his presence obviously concerned them because of the institutional paranoia that seems to affect them where photography is concerned.
It seems to have arisen because many police officers have a poor understanding of the recent incursions to civil liberties which some newish laws have provided. Their misunderstanding has been compounded (or at least not corrected) by their senior officers to the extent that many of them now believe they can stop anybody doing anything at a whim. It is unfortunate that they rarely seem to exercise these misunderstandings to the benefit of people going about their business (by, for example, removing aggressive drunks from the High Street) but instead seem to direct their hostility to people like the young man in this incident. However, that’s another argument.
“Joe Public” has been deliberately kept in ignorance about the true extent of some of these laws (and in some cases – particularly with regard to photography of children - he has even been actively misinformed) to such an extent that very few people know what the police can and cannot do. As a result, as in this instance, if unchecked they often end up doing what they legally cannot do. I found it very notable that in this instance, when repeatedly pressed for a reason for their actions, the explanation swung violently from anti-social behaviour, through “personal public privacy” (eh?), breach of the peace, obstruction, a hint at paedophilia and finally to anti-terrorism. It is clear that the officers had not formulated a proper reason to ask him to move on before they did so.
Essentially the officers involved simply thought the young man needed to be moved on. They did not particularly know why, but his presence obviously concerned them because of the institutional paranoia that seems to affect them where photography is concerned.
Sorry, it wasn't intended as a "loaded" question. I was asking as I simply don't have the correct frame of reference for speaking on the subject of reform.
The kind of "shake up" you outline is something I think a lot of people feel about society in general at the moment - everything is too complex, too much paper-work, too much red-tape, too many noses in the trough.
Thanks for your comments Orc.
Spare Ed
The kind of "shake up" you outline is something I think a lot of people feel about society in general at the moment - everything is too complex, too much paper-work, too much red-tape, too many noses in the trough.
Thanks for your comments Orc.
Spare Ed
it is not just photographers who are pushed about by police
we get more like airstrip one everyday
http://menmedia.co.uk...ed_out?all_comments=1
we get more like airstrip one everyday
http://menmedia.co.uk...ed_out?all_comments=1
OrcadianOil,
You may well be a former Police Officer, however the apparently "nebulous phrase" I have used is based on current legislation and procedure.
As of December 2007 all PCSOs have been designated a set of 20 standard powers, with a further 22 powers available to them at the discretion of the Chief Constable/Commissioner. As previously stated by me, the standard powers include the power to detain and the power to issue a penalty notice for disorder. As you seem to be ignorant of the current role of a PCSO I point you to relevant websites, namely The MPA...
http://www.mpa.gov.uk...s/sop/2009/090305/12/
...The Home Office...
http://webarchive.nat...nity-support-officer/
...and Schedule 4 of The Police Reform Act 2002, the primary instrument which confers such powers, with particular emphasis on Section 2 Power to detain etc. ...
http://www.statutelaw...2639&hideCommentary=1
You may well be a former Police Officer, however the apparently "nebulous phrase" I have used is based on current legislation and procedure.
As of December 2007 all PCSOs have been designated a set of 20 standard powers, with a further 22 powers available to them at the discretion of the Chief Constable/Commissioner. As previously stated by me, the standard powers include the power to detain and the power to issue a penalty notice for disorder. As you seem to be ignorant of the current role of a PCSO I point you to relevant websites, namely The MPA...
http://www.mpa.gov.uk...s/sop/2009/090305/12/
...The Home Office...
http://webarchive.nat...nity-support-officer/
...and Schedule 4 of The Police Reform Act 2002, the primary instrument which confers such powers, with particular emphasis on Section 2 Power to detain etc. ...
http://www.statutelaw...2639&hideCommentary=1
ABerrant,
I retired prior to 2007. I note what your links say, but there are strict criteria attached re PCSO power to detain. I do, however, acknowledge the slight addition to their powers.
In practice, though, and I don't know this answer, it would be very interesting to learn how many PCSOs have (ever?) tried to put the 30 minute detention into practice. I'd wager, very few, based on overall experience of them. And that's not a criticism, for why run the risk of perhaps severe injury when your conditions of service are, let's say, not as "protected" as that of a regular Officer. Common sense plays a very large part in policing, regardless of what a piece of legislation may tell you. In other words, being street wise. "Practical policing's" its more common name.
I retired prior to 2007. I note what your links say, but there are strict criteria attached re PCSO power to detain. I do, however, acknowledge the slight addition to their powers.
In practice, though, and I don't know this answer, it would be very interesting to learn how many PCSOs have (ever?) tried to put the 30 minute detention into practice. I'd wager, very few, based on overall experience of them. And that's not a criticism, for why run the risk of perhaps severe injury when your conditions of service are, let's say, not as "protected" as that of a regular Officer. Common sense plays a very large part in policing, regardless of what a piece of legislation may tell you. In other words, being street wise. "Practical policing's" its more common name.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.